When MPs get suspended from Parliament

Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha have a history of mass suspensions aimed at retaining order in the House and control chaos

New Delhi: A member of Parliament (MP) smashed a glass and brandished a sharp piece — as if to slash his own wrist — as the Rajya Sabha turned almost into a battle zone on March 9, 2010 when it cleared the historic Women’s Reservation Bill. The Bill aimed to give one-third seats in state assemblies and the Lok Sabha exclusively to women lawmakers.

Suspension orders are sometimes revoked if lawmakers express regret for their conduct (PTI)

The bill, however, was never cleared in the Lok Sabha.

During the course of discussions that spread of March 8 and 9, 2010, a total of seven MPs were suspended as emotions ran high, protests turned violent and political divides sharpened over arguments whether the bill should have a “quota within quota” to further accommodate SC and ST women.

From women’s bill to the days of the Telanagana agitation, from the controversial farm bills to the latest ongoing protests over price rise, Parliament has witnessed an array of political situations acting catalysts of furious protests, often leading to suspension of MPs.

Whatever be the provocation, the Parliament uses a standard line to justify suspension of its lawmakers. Every resolution, to explain the suspension, mentions, “for serious note of misconduct in utter disregard of the House and the authority of the Chair...”

A history of suspensions

In 1963, President Sarvapalli Radhakrishan was delivering his address to both Houses in the Central Hall when an MP interrupted him and walked out. This incident was enough to invoke the rules of suspension against the errant MP, marking it the first such case in the history of Indian Parliament.

Raj Narain—known best for defeating late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections—was twice suspended in 1966 and 1974.

Arguably the biggest uproar in the Lok Sabha in the 1980s over suspension of MPs took place on March 15, 1989 when as many as 63 lawmakers, or nearly 12% of the strength of the House, was suspended in a day amid furor over the MP Thakkar Commission report on Indira Gandhi’s assassination. The report had identified several loopholes in the security apparatus of the late PM and also blamed some of the people considered close to Gandhi.

But as the polity saw further diversification with the advent of strong regional satraps, disruptions and thereby disciplinary actions, became more frequent. Former finance minister Pranab Mukherjee had remarked several times how “a small party of 8-10 MPs are enough to stall proceedings in Parliament.”

A report by The Print shows that cases of suspension has gone up by substantially during the rule of Prime Minister Narendra Modi compared to the period between 2006 and 2014. Between the monsoon session of 2006 and February 2014, 51 MPs were suspended in both Houses while 139 were suspended between monsoon session of 2015 and now.

Same-side goal

Suspension, as evident from nearly all cases, usually takes place in the Opposition camps. But in 2012, the ruling Congress had to suspend its own party MPs to quell pro-Telangana and anti-Telangana protests in Parliament. A total of eight Lok Sabha MPs, all Congress leaders, were suspended after they continued protests despite senior ministers asking them to return to their seats.

Again in 2013, when the Telangana agitation gained further momentum, Parliament didn’t remain insulated from its political impact. At the forefront of the protests were Congress and Telugu Desam Party (TDP) MPs, with the latter staunchly opposed to the creation of a new state in the Telugu-speaking region.

While the government moved a resolution to suspended eight Congress for the remainder of the session, it also moved suspension notice against four TDP lawmakers for the same reason.

Mass suspension over the ages

Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha have a history of mass suspensions aimed at retaining order in the House and control chaos.

In 2020, Trinamool Congress floor leader Derek O’Brien and Aam Admi Party leader Sanjay Singh, Congress leaders Rajeev Satav, Syed Nasir Hussain and Ripun Borah, CPIM’s KK Ragesh and Elamaram Kareem and Trinamool’s Dola Sen were suspended by Rajya Sabha chairman Venkaiah Naidu for “gross disorderly conduct”.

The Lok Sabha too has seen several such mass suspensions. It saw the suspension of 18 Andhra Pradesh MPs in February 2014 during the Telangana issue under by then Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar.

Suspension orders are sometimes revoked if lawmakers express regret for their conduct.

Last year, the entire winter session was nearly washed out after 12 Opposition lawmakers were suspended for the entire session following a clash between them and parliamentary officials in the previous session. In 2020, too, MPs were suspended after massive protests over the passage of farm bills.

Where LS and RS converge, where they diverge

To be sure, suspension of errant MPs has remained an effective tool to bring back peace and order in the House, giving instant results. But it had never been the preferred way for presiding officers to handle difficult situations.

“All Presiding officers try their best to resolve stalemates through dialogues and there are enough avenues available in our Parliamentary system to break a deadlock amicably. But at times, they have no other option,” said an MP.

If the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha sport different colours, green and pale red, the two Houses have different set of rules that also makes the process of suspension distinct in each House.

Lok Sabha Speaker, as the House rules suggest, has an advantage over the Rajya Sabha Chairman in matters related to suspension of MPs. He can automatically suspend MPs in the event of grave disorder. While this rule was incorporated only in December 2001, it had been invoked four times in 15th Lok Sabha and five times in 16th Lok Sabha.

Rule 374A of the Lower House says, “Notwithstanding anything contained in rules 373 and 374, in the event of grave disorder occasioned by a member coming into the well of the House or abusing the Rules of the House persistently and wilfully obstructing its business by shouting slogans or otherwise, such member shall, on being named by the Speaker, stand automatically suspended from the service of the House for five consecutive sittings or the remainder of the session, whichever is less: Provided that the House may, at any time, on a motion being made, resolve that such suspension be terminated.”

In other words, the Speaker would not require any assistance but on his own can determine if any lawmaker has created grave disorder and can suspend him. This power of automatic suspension—albeit not widely used—allows the Lok Sabha Speaker to keep things under control, if situation arises.

There have been discussions to amend the rules and add this automatic suspension provision in the Upper House too, but no final decision has been taken so far.

The other two provisions of suspension are similar in both the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, under different rules. Rule 373 of the Lok Sabha and 255 of the Upper House says the Chair member “direct any member whose conduct is in his opinion grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately” from the House and the member must do so forthwith for the remainder of the day.

Similarly, Lok Sabha’s Rule 374 (1) and Rajya Sabha’s Rule 256 says that the Speaker or the Chairman might “name a member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and wilfully obstructing the business.” and if he or she is named, a motion can be brought to suspend the MP “from the service of the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session.”